Quote from: snooggums;791416Actually, he said that he wold suicide any character that didn't allow him to start with an 18 because the game wants him to do so:
"I would do that, so I could start with a 17 (--> 18 with human bonus), so I could get 20 in my primary stat earlier, so I could take the second feat I wanted earlier. I would expect this within three rolls.
...
It's kind of terrible, and I wouldn't *want* to do it, but that's what the game tells me to do. It wouldn't be a problem if it didn't give relatively poor stats to point-bought/array characters."

Apparently the game having point buy is a lie, and it is really a sentient being commanding players to kill characters so they can get a starting 18 stat.
.

I've played a lot of 5e, and I'm pretty sure I don't recall anywhere in the books where it tells you play that way.  I do see a lot of "play however you want to play" stuff though.

I'm getting less and less patience for people who act like douchebags and try to blame the book for their douchbaggery rather than look in the mirror.

But really, it's the same attitude that permeates everything else over there, even the non-RPG related stuff.  "It's always someone else's fault and I'm being victimized."  Hell, you just had a mod ban someone for a month for literally not agreeing with his side of an argument.

The good news is it allows me to see red flags of those types of players I never want to play with.

Quote from: Brad;791436Yes, but for WHAT game? In OD&D and B/X, 3D6 in order creates perfectly playable characters. In 3.5 or Pathfinder, 3D6 in order is probably a bad idea. Even in AD&D there's really no difference between an 8 and a 15 STR.

To echo Old Geezer from some other thread, stats in D&D aren't everything, but they're not nothing, either.

The main thing I'm focused on right now is B/X-derived ACKS, which does have 3d6 in order by default, and which I binned immediately. The notion that stats don't matter is bollocks, and is only true of OD&D (and I guess AD&D1) where by design (so far as there was any design) they did little.

In B/X and ACKS the average range is 9-12, stats either side of that matters, because it has a real in-game impact. A Fighter with Str 16 in B/X isn't just getting an XP bonus (which is mostly irrelevant anyway), they're better than the Str 12 Fighter every single time they swing a weapon, hitting more frequently and doing more damage every time. They can also wear heavier armour (without impacting their movement) and carry more loot. That's an arbitrarily created disparity between those two players which never goes away.

That's leaving aside the lack of choice intrinsic to the "in order" part, which is at least as shitty as the low spread. It is, however, a different issue entirely.
 

Quote from: Brad;791436That said, 3D6 in order using random.org:

STR 13
INT 12
WIS 9
DEX 11
CON 9
CHA 11

In B/X, I could make a viable fighter, cleric, thief, dwarf, elf, halfling, or magic-user. So, yeah, your assertion is wrong.

The only thing of note is that they are stronger than average. Otherwise they're average, and with rather poor health for anyone physically oriented - the moment they get hit with ageing effects, for example, they are on a CON penalty. They're only viable for the very lowest sort of threshold of viability.

Why is this person an adventurer, when they clearly aren't cut out for it? Unless they're going to play spear-carrier to the more competent adventurer. Which is a different issue to disparities between players.

Quote from: jeff37923;791439Looks like I struck a nerve.

Only insofar as it's always the same arguments, with the same canards and straw men each time over.

Quote from: jeff37923;791439So, what kind of system do you use for character creation?

For my game I used a randomised generation of arrays, and anyone could take any array they liked, in a non-exclusive fashion. As it turned out, everyone used the same array, though we got different manifestations in what they did with it.

Generating the array was:  Roll 1d6+12, 2d6+6 twice and 3d6 four times. Drop the lowest result from these seven rolls.

You may choose to use either your array, or that of anyone else at the table. Once you have your array, you may arrange them however you like, moving up to 2 points (at a 1:1 ratio) around.

My recent "fix" for rolling stats (and their importance for players, concerns from some players wildly overshadowing others, etc) is to have the group roll stats together, and everyone ends up with the same array.  4d6 take the best, everyone rolls once or twice (depending on the number of players), and then everyone gets to put that set of six rolls onto their sheet, in whatever order they like.  

You still get the randomness of that comparatively traditional chargen method, you still get the fun of a swingy high roll making your character great at something (maybe), you still get the risk of a swingy low roll making your character pretty awful at something (maybe), you still get the thunder of the dice and the anticipation as folks wait to see what their stats are gonna be like...but you then also end up with in-group parity, instead of someone being General Eighteen and someone else stuck playing Second Lieutenant Nine.

Quote from: Kiero;791458Why is this person an adventurer, when they clearly aren't cut out for it? Unless they're going to play spear-carrier to the more competent adventurer. Which is a different issue to disparities between players.

Because heroes are heroes because of what they are willing to risk, not because of their competence (not that competence doesn't help). I'm honestly surprised this this question has any legs in fantasy role playing.

 Man, if only somebody could come up with an example of an epic fantasy tale about a hero completely unsuited to being an adventurer.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;791462Because heroes are heroes because of what they are willing to risk, not because of their competence (not that competence doesn't help). I'm honestly surprised this this question has any legs in fantasy role playing.

 Man, if only somebody could come up with an example of an epic fantasy tale about a hero completely unsuited to being an adventurer.

The Hobbit.

EDIT: The Book of Three by Lloyd Alexander.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;791462Man, if only somebody could come up with an example of an epic fantasy tale about a hero completely unsuited to being an adventurer.

Terry Brooks came up with this unique concept when he wrote Sword of Shannarra    (yes, I did catch the sarcasm, hence my own)


*Edit*  On a related note, I used the Hobbit example in a thread about starting at 1st level with new PCs and people like Paraxis saying that it never happens.  "It" being an experienced group of people agreeing to take on an inexperienced one, and therefore, all new PCs should be the same level as the rest of the party.  

It's like some people have no idea about the roots of what D&D is based off of and inspired by.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;791465Terry Brooks came up with this unique concept when he wrote Sword of Shannarra    (yes, I did catch the sarcasm, hence my own)

You and your wacky corner case exceptions!

Quote from: Will;791455If you insist on random stats in a game where stats matter and stats can vary a lot... you're being a dick expecting one person to just play el schmucko for the campaign.

No, you're only being a dick, maybe, if you don't make it clear beforehand that that is how your group does chargen... knowing that many Players have issues with it.
When our GM told us his next go round would be straight six I was excited... it adds potential limitation and variation, but I'm quite happy to play less than optimal PCs. It's not a macho thing... just my taste in characters, where everyone being blandly competent and 'equal' seems less interesting.

Quote from: Simlasa;791468No, you're only being a dick if you don't make it clear beforehand that that is how your group does chargen... knowing that many Players have issues with it.
When our GM told us his next go round would be straight six I was excited... it adds potential limitation and variation, but I'm quite happy to play less than optimal PCs. It's not a macho thing... just my taste in characters, where everyone being blandly competent and 'equal' seems less interesting.

Indeed. I like a game of Fantasy Special Forces/Batman every now and then, but that is too one dimensional for my tastes to be the norm.

Quote from: Critias;791459My recent "fix" for rolling stats (and their importance for players, concerns from some players wildly overshadowing others, etc) is to have the group roll stats together, and everyone ends up with the same array.  4d6 take the best, everyone rolls once or twice (depending on the number of players), and then everyone gets to put that set of six rolls onto their sheet, in whatever order they like.  

You still get the randomness of that comparatively traditional chargen method, you still get the fun of a swingy high roll making your character great at something (maybe), you still get the risk of a swingy low roll making your character pretty awful at something (maybe), you still get the thunder of the dice and the anticipation as folks wait to see what their stats are gonna be like...but you then also end up with in-group parity, instead of someone being General Eighteen and someone else stuck playing Second Lieutenant Nine.

That's certainly one way of doing it.

I confess that i've never, ever seen 'dice envy' in a group. In fact, it's so alien to me that it boggles me. I'm not competing against the other players.

I get the impression that many gaming groups have far more jealousy, resentment, and internal competition than mine have. There seems to be a lot of concern that one person will get an 18 and another won't and that might generate ill feelings.

That's sad.

Quote from: One Horse Town;791470That's certainly one way of doing it.

I confess that i've never, ever seen 'dice envy' in a group. In fact, it's so alien to me that it boggles me. I'm not competing against the other players.

I don't see it with adults either.  I only see that behavior from children.  "how come he got a bigger piece than me" stuff, which essentially is the same thing we're talking about with dice envy

Quote from: One Horse Town;791470That's certainly one way of doing it.

I confess that i've never, ever seen 'dice envy' in a group. In fact, it's so alien to me that it boggles me. I'm not competing against the other players.

It's an issue that I think ties into the hobby's paranoia about class balance, and similar issues.  When folks are worried about one class taking the limelight, it's a pretty natural extension to then also obsess over one player's stats overshadowing another's.  

*shrug*

Mostly I like it as part of a teambuilding thing in general.  Group chargen, group solidarity around rolls, everyone cheering when someone comes through and the whole group gets a sweet 18, that sort of thing.  It turns the solo chargen minigame into a group affair, the "balance" stuff is largely secondary to me.

I revel in 3d6 straight down. I'm very good at whipping up something competent from it. Besides, in play nothing matters if you can barely roll higher than a 5 on a d20 (which happens to me a lot, blessed by the dice gods and all).

So might as well go for the flavor!

Quote from: Brad;791436To echo Old Geezer from some other thread, stats in D&D aren't everything, but they're not nothing, either. That said, 3D6 in order using random.org:

STR 13
INT 12
WIS 9
DEX 11
CON 9
CHA 11

Challenge accepted. Basic 5e chargen, go!

Random class, d4. Rolled 2, fighter.
Random background, d6. Rolled 2, criminal.

Ta-dah!

Ephraim
Human Fighter, Criminal Enforcer
Lvl 1, PB +2. Saves: STR, CON. Alignment: ??
HD: d10. HP: 10. AC: 18

STR 14 (+2), DEX 12 (+1), CON 10 (+0), INT 13 (+1), WIS 10 (+0), CHA 12 (+1)

Race: Human — All stats +1.

Lang: Common, +(lang?).

Class:
Fighting Style, Protection — react, Disadv atk v. target 5' from you, must see attacker & wield shield.
Second Wind — bonus act, 1d10+lvl HP. short or long rest recharge.

Skills: Acrobatics +3, Athletics +4, Deception (bkrd) +3, Stealth (bkrd) +3.

Tools: Thieves' Tools. Dice Set.

Background: Criminal. Feature: Criminal Contacts.
Personality: friendly. Ideal: charity. Bond: family man. Flaw: patsy
Gear: crowbar, dark common clothes w/ hood, pouch +15 gp.

Wealth: 15 gp. Spent 13.15 gp. Left 1.85 gp.

Quickstart: a) chain mail, a) lg. sword & shield, a) lt. xbow & 20 bolts, b) explorer's pack.

Armor: Chain Mail - 75 GP, AC 16. Shield - +2 AC.
Weapons:
1x L. Sword - 15 gp. +4 atk. 1d8+2. versatile (1d10).
1x Lt. Xbow - 25 gp. +3 atk. 1d8+1. ammo (rng 80/320), loading, two-handed
20x Bolts
2x Dagger - 2 gp. +4 atk. 1d4+2. light, finesse, thrown, (rng 20/60).
20x Darts - 5 cp. +4 atk. 1d4+2. finesse, thrown, (rng 20/60).
2x Net - 1 gp. +4 atk. special, thrown, (rng 5/ 15).

Gear: Explorer’s Pack - 10 gp (backpack, bedroll, mess kit, tinderbox, 10x torches, 10x rations, water skin, rope hemp 50'), Quiver - 1 gp, Lantern hooded - 5 gp, Dice Set - 1 sp, Signal Whistle - 5 cp.

Trinket: Knucklebone dice, with skulls instead of 6's.

Playstyle: Defensive melee enforcer, getaway man; use Protection often. Also use darts, grab, or shove to control the field. Grab an opponent and use them as 1/2 cover to get +2 AC, reach AC 20; you only need one-hand to grab. Shove them prone or away as necessary with Athletics. Net nastier targets. Ideally lethal force is reserved for last resorts, because who wants to deal with law investigations?

---------

Easy stuff. Still could take this array in other directions, too. Any special requests?

Quote from: Opaopajr;791478I revel in 3d6 straight down. I'm very good at whipping up something competent from it.

Besides which, soooo much of the enjoyment... for me... comes from how I play the character. My current PC in our Pathfinder game has mediocre stats except for a stellar charisma and he's been a boatload of fun.
Maybe a part of the issue is having the imagination to look past what's on the character sheet? (I sometimes wish character sheets would go away)
But I suppose that's edging close to the old role vs. roll argument that folks hate so much.